Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. You'll receive an email shortly with a link to create a new password. If you have trouble finding this email, please check your spam folder.

I hold back from commenting upon the politics of other countries as I am too far removed to be able to discuss with a high degree of confidence. The author may be a fellow of the LSE but is far removed from having his finger on the pulse within the UK.

The only point he has got right is the course of action taken by Cameron and why.

As to the points on May ( I am not a Tory supporter) why should the UK not seek to be self efficient with regards to medical professionals ( I am married to a non UK one). Why should the UK suck out the scarce resources of other nations who cannot afford to lose such an investment. The UK is an outward looking country and more so than many other EU states and I have degree of confidence that the UK will remain so after Brexit. This is a state whose history is built and defined by the benefits of immigration ( I am a product of it) and it will disappoint many from ethnic minorities who voted leave in order to stop Europeans working in the UK and open up to the old commonwealth. It wont, it will carry on in some shape or form but with some restrictions.

My last comment is to those who bang on about an unelected Prime Minister, they have all been unelected by a public plebiscite, it is not a part of the British institutions. Our system of government is a majoritarian parliamentary democracy as it is in many countries and in which all PM's are unelected by the people.

Well ... Not so much. They declared themselves unhappy with a fantasy version of EU membership, and with no understanding of exactly how intimately all the EU economies are interdependent. Britain is essentially still nostalgic for its 'Glory Days'. But beyond having 'lost an empire and not yet found a role' (Dean Acheson, around 1962) - it has now completely lost its wits. Good luck with that. You're largely dependent on the kindness of strangers, who you're systematically alienating. Loony tunes.

Philippe Legrain is hugely disappointed with Theresa May. Soon after she succeeded David Cameron in July there was much euphoria that she would be Britain's answer to Angela Merkel, "building an open, outward-looking, free-trading" country. She was determined to unify the "Leave" and "Remain" camps within her party and govern in the best interests of the whole country - to reconcile the 52% "Brexiteers" with the 48% "Bremainers." Instead she is on her way to become another Marine Le Pen, a populist riding the same wave of nativism as Donald Trump.
During the Tory Party conference in Birmingham last week May made clear that "national control over immigration – not continued membership in the EU single market – to be her priority" in negotiations with the EU after triggering Article 50 by the end of March 2017. EU leaders "rightly insist on freedom of movement as a central pillar of the single market," with Angela Merkel and François Hollande having signaled "to take a tougher line with the UK."
Legrain points out that May's "nativist lurch" has raised heckles in Britain, and she goes to great lengths to pander to the hardliners within her party, by adopting "a deeply illiberal vision" - "economic interventionism, political nationalism, and cultural xenophobia," putting herself on par with Marine Le Pen and Hungary's Viktor Orbán.
Her speech at the conference targeted "both 'international elites' and Britons with a cosmopolitan outlook." She said her Britain needed a "bold, new positive vision" for the future - "a country that works not for a privileged few but for every one of us." She rebuked those, who find Brexiteers' patriotism "distasteful" and their "concerns about immigration parochial, /their/ views about crime illiberal.” She went on mocking those who believe in "world citizenship," saying "you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means.”
Now it becomes clear that UK-based businesses should prioritise the employment of British citizens, which is another idea for “national preference” according to Le Pen. This will have an impact on the "status of EU nationals in the UK." What is certain is that "May wants to keep out future EU migrants, whom she wrongly blames for taking Britons’ jobs and depressing their wages." Her Home Secretary Amber Rudd "called for UK-based businesses to list their foreign staff, which would serve to “name and shame” companies that do not employ “enough” Britons. These measures remind of a movement in the 1970s, when the racist National Front Party called for “British jobs for British workers.”
There is no way that the government "expects Citibank to operate in London without American staff, Nissan without Japanese managers, and global companies without their diverse talent." No wonder foreign companies are reconsidering their investment plans in Britain. May "wants the UK to be “self-sufficient” in health care by 2025" without importing foreign work forces in the health services. She will have to persuade more British students to study medicine and Britons to carry out the work that they are reluctant to do.
The author doubts whether May is up to her task to govern. "She seems clueless about how an open market economy works, and unaware that international trade, investment, and migration are intertwined." She appears proud of London being the world’s financial capital, "without acknowledging that this is thanks mostly to foreign banks that employ foreign staff (those “citizens of the world”) to serve international markets, including the EU’s." And worst of all, many in London had voted to remain in the June referendum. It is true that many voted to leave the EU, "but they did not specify how; so May has no electoral mandate for her swing toward illiberalism." Unfortunately the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn is "not electorally viable." The only hope may be a comeback of the Liberal Democrats. "Britain may need a new political party (or cross-party alliance) to fight for a country that is outward-looking, liberal, and tolerant."﻿

When parliament voted for the referendum to be decided by UK voters to be in or out of EU, the parliament did understand that out of EU meant out of the single market. Those voters who did not understand this did not do their homework and probably went by "Project Fear".
It seems that you are an interested party and would like to reverse the EU referendum vote, and do not understand that out of EU means not being a member of EU single market which is the most important component of EU.

Britain doesneed to get the blinds up and come to terms with the idea that to survive as a society they have to trade, and to do so they will have to do so in a mutually beneficial environment. All too often the British, secure in their sense of entitlement (aka self-importance) assume they can TELL the rest of the world how things will work. If they have noticed that their collasing currency is a signal that theis is not true they need to wake up.

Britain has grown wealthy (thought the money hasn't been well-distributed) as the treasurer/ banker for the EU. If the UK doesn't want to play by EU rules this will stop, and about 10% (other estimates are higher) will vanish, never to return. The country's wellbeing depends on the provision of services, but the terms of this are outside the UK's control. The choices are a change of attitude or poverty.

This is a fundamentally racist and chauvinist piece, offensive, bigoted and vain in all ways basically designed to falsely demonise the British.
"EU Governments rightly insist on freedom of movement"
Well France is the creator of 3 tier apartheid concerning this for each expansion of the EU, and Germany has taken most advantage of it, in the case of Poland taking 7 years of special arrangements including work permits. In contrast to complete compliance from the UK every time! Its very likely that Brexit would not have happened without this discrimination.
So why are you repeating what is basically misleading German supremacist propaganda?
As for the application of Freedom of movement, compare a British hospital with a French one - the latter looks like a Gallic supremacist convention, the British one completely cosmopolitan,
Amanda Rudd is a remain supporter, and aristocracy advisor and has about as much to do with the typical UK leave voter as you have to do with informed journalism - zero, and she was immediately told to desist by leave supporters. I certainly would not want to play the game of the racist EU that has had 2/3 under representation in UK recruitment and running some departments as racial sinecures.
Readers should understand how threatening it is to have German and French supremacists leaders threatening a trade war unless an independent UK submits to having its borders controlled from Berlin and pay tribute.

This is a rather bad tempered and shouty article with no actual analysis of what is happening. A lot of assertions with no rationale or references to back them up.

The UK government has to set a baseline expectation of our future relationship with the EU and it is entirely sensible they start out with a low expectation. This primarily achieves two things; firstly it conditions the electorate to the worst potential outcome and secondly it signals to the negotiating counter-parties that we are prepared for the expense of preserving our position in regards to the 'red line' issues.

Perhaps. Optimistically I hope that you are right, As for your point about 'citizenship' elsewhere. I do know what the word means,but simply mean that Ms May can't tell me who I am - or my relationshp to the UK (as a card-carrying metropoitan liberal). I could ignore it for silly party conference knock-about (all parties do this) but for the nasty racist tinge to the debate sometimes - which is not happening in some rarefied academic environment. Her statement does not help this. She is better than this. Best Tim

The author rightly questions an Unelected Prime Minister - The Referendum answer needs to be better understood.
The Referendum DID NOT allow rejection of Economic Growth.
The Referendum DID NOT allow the burial of hopes of the next generation.
The Referendum DID NOT permit departure from Europe - The EU is not Europe.
The Referendum DID NOT seek to extinguish Britain's membership of European Economics.

The Referendum Results required a crystal clear understanding of directions for Britain.
The Referendum Results must be debated and discussed to discover what it meant.
The Referendum Results if understood perfectly, have the answers that are needed.
Should the clarity be in any doubt, there are checks and balances that need to be triggered.
To achieve the policy directions that deliver Prosperity for Britain - however defined.

The economics prognostications now being disembowelled - were also on display before the Referendum.
The choice that Britain Made was despite the dire warnings of impending disasters.
Membership of The European Union was rejected - and must be respected.
The engagement with Europe needs to be better harnessed to produce the growth that Britain needs.
Alternatives to the Institutional Architecture that prevails - European Union principally - were NOT REJECTED.

The Leave Leadership is now inside The Cabinet with Three Brexiteers.
The Leave Leadership is both responsible and accountable.
Should they admit a mistake in the heat of the moment.
Honesty is the first step towards perfection of wisdom.
Checks and balances are available to correct the course if the country.
Authors like Legrain are also available to admonish and advocate the right path.

Fanatics are those that will not change their minds, when they can't change the World.
Fanaticism is not needed inside Britain's governance.
Fanaticism is not needed inside Europe's governance.
Meltdowns are NOT ANSWERS.

The PM's phrase that "If you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means.” was particularly shameful. There may be an economic case to be made for the UK outside the EU -relatively it is declining in importance compared to the rest of the world.But the political, cultural and social impact on the UK is quite likely to be disastrous. We truly risk becoming a meaner-spirited nation as a result. Who really wants to live in a place where it's okay to be xenophobic? I am a proud citizen of the world - and of the UK.

May's modus operandi for a hard Brexit is clearly a callous attempt with myopic vision. If ever Britain falls in a conundrum in the near or far future, then EU support to Britain will be a tough one to achieve. And as clearly mentioned in the other comments , it's a nihilistic distortion of Britain's own values

Some of the 52% majority place single market membership above immigration - with government ministers stressing that the vote was about sovereignty and control of immigration rather than absolute reduction. A significant share of 48% favour remaining in the single market. Which points to a majority of the population favouring a soft Brexit. I expect May's stance is partly an opening negotiation position. I hope that her opening speech on social equity as Prime Minister reflects her true values more than her latest speech at the Tory conference, but she is certainly alarming the fx markets (and liberals like myself).

Reality in the form of on-going islamization, terrorists free floating around, parliaments disempowered, borders unprotected, the rule of law permanently broken, socities deeply polarized, poor people left behind and the constitutional order abandoned proves the former position dangerously wrong, short-sighted, benefitting only the few at the expense of the many and a nihilistic distortion of our own values.

There were a lot of hopes that May will continue to be a moderniser liberal as PM, as she appeared occasionally in the past. It seems that she is instead both a hostage of the radical right wing of her party which felt empowered by the referendum result and also an opportunist in grabbing and wanting to maintain power at all cost. The initial rhetoric with a strong social-democratic feel is likely to be just that – rhetoric. It is unlikely that the conservatives will be able (or even willing) to borrow and spend on infrastructure projects to kick-start the recovery of manufacturing or to invest in public services in order to ameliorate the socio-economic condition of the many disappointed working class Brexit voters. The high deficit and public sector debt simply stand in the way of serious borrowing and investment. And with a weaker pound, let’s just wait and see how high inflation goes and what happens to interest rates. All this before we start seeing a substantial Brexit induced slowing down of the economy.
The idea of a new, centrist movement or party has been talked about since the referendum. Primarily, we see Labour irreconcilably divided and pretty close to a split. The Conservatives are not yet there, but with the dominance of the radical and nationalist right wing of the party, the moderates will feel alienated and they are likely to see themselves betrayed by May. Once they are hopelessly cornered, they will be ready to leave, but we are not yet there. It is not impossible to imagine a new party formed by Labour Party Blairites and moderate left-wingers, modernising liberal Tories and whatever is left of the Liberal Democrats. And such a party could be in a coalition with the Scottish, Welsh and Norther Irish nationalists and the Greens, so theoretically, they could win power.
The UK’s electoral system of first past the poll favours the existing two big parties. However, we have seen pretty radical changes to this recently: the emergence of the SNP in Scotland and the resulting collapse of Scottish Labour. Also, times are different now than they were in the 1970s when the Social Democratic Party split from Labour and more or less failed as a political entity (it merged with the Liberals). Today we see in many countries new parties or movements challenging existing parties, coming from nowhere and achieving fast recognition and parliamentary representation. Social media has completely changed political communication, campaigning, fundraising, mobilisation of voters etc. There is a thirst for something new equal to the disappointment in the current system.
It seems a bit of a coincidence to see Tony Blair hinting to a return to politics, Nick Clegg re-emerging in the media and Ed Milliband being suddenly more active. It is not that hard to imagine these three former leaders working together. But of course, this would be a high risk strategy for all sorts of reasons and the timing might not yet be right. Interesting times!

It's logical that if there is a hard Brexit, exports will have to be redirected from Europe to new destinations. A lower pound helps this. Increased government spending on infrastructure and the like helps support companies in the transition time.

Call it turning inward or socialism or whatever but the British are making the right moves to support their economy. They could have gone with austerity and trashed the place.

Immigration will follow export and manufacturing priorities, I wouldn't be surprised if they adopt a points based system and those European countries that allow easier British exports will get more points for their nationals.